On Dec 20, 2007 10:46 AM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/20/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Amend Rule 2126 (Voting Credits) by replacing "Assessor" with
> > >"Accountor".
> >
> > Amendment fails: there are two separate instances of "Assessor" in
> > that rule. You must
Roger Hicks wrote:
>In the absence of a specification it is reasonably implied that all
>instances should be replaced.
I don't think so. It's always been made explicit before, when multiple
replacements were desired. I think in the absence of such specification
the proposal is assuming that ther
On 12/20/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Amend Rule 2126 (Voting Credits) by replacing "Assessor" with
> >"Accountor".
>
> Amendment fails: there are two separate instances of "Assessor" in
> that rule. You must specify which instance(s) you want to replace.
>
In the absence of a specific
3 matches
Mail list logo
